NC: Maintenance of Health/Behavior Change Following Short-term CBT (2008)

Citation:
 
Study Design:
Class:
- Click here for explanation of classification scheme.
Quality Rating:
Research Purpose:

The objective of this study was to examine the long-term weight loss maintenance of individuals completing a structured weight loss program.

Inclusion Criteria:
  • Studies were required to:
    • Have been conducted in the United States
    • Have included participants in a structured weight loss program
    • Have provided follow-up data with variance estimates for more than two years
  • Primary outcome variables were weight loss maintenance in kilograms, weight loss maintenance as a percent of initial weight loss and weight loss as a percentage of initial body weight (reduced weight).

 

Exclusion Criteria:
  • Two reports were excluded because they did not provide specific weight-loss information at follow-up times
  • Another study was excluded because the group included only children of persons with Type 2 diabetes. 
Description of Study Protocol:

Recruitment

  • A MEDLINE literature search for the period of 1970 to 1999 was used to identify candidate studies
  • An "ancestry approach" was also used by consulting reference lists from single studies and pertinent literature reviews.

Statistical Analysis

For each study, summary results of all reported values and additional relevant study attributes were recorded, coded and tabulated for analysis.

  • The primary effect estimate was calculated as follows: Weight loss maintenance (kg) plus initial body weight minus body weight at follow-up (1)
  • Other outcome variables were calculated as follows:
    • Parentage weight loss maintenance (percentage) = (weight loss maintenance / average initial weight loss) x 100 (2)
    • Reduced weight (percentage) = (weight loss maintenance / average initial weight loss) x 100 (3)
  • The variance estimates for these two outcome variables, respectively, were calculated as follows:
    • Variance (weight loss maintenance) / (average initial weight loss)2
    • Variance (weight loss maintenance) / (average initial body weight)2.
Data Collection Summary:
  • Timing of measurements: One, two, three, four, five years post-intervention
  • Dependent variables:
    • Weight loss maintenance in kilograms
    • Weight loss maintenance as a percent of initial weight loss
    • Weight loss as a percentage of initial body weight (reduced weight)
  • Independent variables: Very low energy diets (VLED) and hypoenergetic balanced diets (HBD).

 

 

Description of Actual Data Sample:

 Demographic Data for All Studies

Reference N Sex

Age

(Years)

Diet

Length of Treatment

(Weeks)

Initial Weight

(Kg)

Weight Loss

(Kg)

Follow-up

(Years)

Available for Follow-up

(Percentage)

Self-Reported Weight

(Percentage)

Anderson, et al

71

29

F

M

43

43

VLED

VLED

17

12

94

116

17.9

18.2

1,2 & 4

1,2 & 4

58

58

100

100

Anderson, et al

72

28

F

M

41

41

VLED

VLED

22

21

106.8

125.1

31.9

36

1 & 2

1 & 2

73

73

0

0

Anderson, et al

55

25

F

M

42

44

VLED

VLED

28

23

120.7

148

32.4

41.6

1 & 2

1 & 2

58

58

80

80

Anderson, et al

112

72

40

F&M

F

M

46

46

43

VLED

VLED

VLED

22

24

21

108

96.4

128.8

129.1

26.5

35.6

1,2,4, & 5

3

3

100

100

100

30

30

30

Dubbert and Wilson 62 F&M NA HBD 19 91.1 7.8 1&2 96 100
Eubank, et al 45 F&M 50 VLED 23 100 28 2 82 4.4
Fitzwater, et al 213 F&M 40 HBD 30 103.4 7.3 2 69 60
Flynn and Walsh

189

66

F

M

43

VLED

VLED

17

18

102.8

123.9

37.9

39.1

2

2

83

83

100

100

Graham, et al 62 F&M 46 HBD 8 97.7 4.5 5 97 0
Grodstein, et al 325 F&M NA VLED 22 105.9 22 3 59 100
Hall 10 F&M NA HBD 10 83.3 6.1 2 90 0
Hartman, et al

73

29

F

M

42

46

VLED

VLED

22

22

99.5

116.5

24.7

33.5

2

2

74

74

43

43

Hensrud, et al 24 F 59 HBD 15 73.5 12.5 1,2,3 & 4 92 12
Holden, et al

80

38

 F

M

47

46

VLED

VLED

23

27

108

140.1

 25.2

44.2

3

3

100

100

100

100

Jeffery, et al 89  M 53 HBD 15 100.2  13.5  1 & 2

93

 0
Jordon and Canavan  437  F&M 47 HBD 20  97.9  8.5  3 & 5 85 100
Kirschenbaum, et al  65  F&M 38 HBD 12  86.8  6.1  2 90.3  0
Kramer, et al

 83

38

114

 F&M

F

M

53

48

51

HBD

HBD

HBD

15

15

15

100.5

83.1

101.1

 13

8.6

13

 5

1,2,3,&4

1,2,3,&4

93

76

76

7.2

7.2

7.2

Lavery and Loewry

386

123

 F

M

45

45

HBD

HBD

 8

8

 78.7

101.3

3.5

6.2

 2

2

98

98

100

100

Murphy, et al  34  F&M  NA HBD

10

87.5  7.4  1,2&4 77  61.8
Nunn, et al

 44

16

 F

M

51

48

VLED

VLED

22

22

 98.9

119.1

23.2

27.7

 1&2

1&2

82

98

18

18

Pavlou, et al 49  F&M 38 HBD  12  100.1 13.3 3 63 4.4
Stunkard and Penick 32  F&M 40 HBD  12  97 8.2 5 84 63
Stalonas, et al

30

6

 F

M

31

31

HBD

HBD

10

10

 79.4

101.6

4.9

6.3

5

5

82

82

0

0

Sikand, et al 30  F  39 VLED  17  106.1  19.8  2 50 100
Wadden, et al 50  F&M  44 Mixed  23  108.8  16.1 1&3 90 6.7
Wadden, et al 76  F  42 Mixed  23  106  14.6 1&5 62 47
Wadden and Frey

508

113

 F

M

 44

47

VLED

VLED

 26

26

 104.9

134.1

 23.7

34.3

2,3,4&5

2,3,4&5

54

54

100

100

Walsh and Flynn

189

66

 F

M

 45

47

VLED

VLED

18

19

100.7

123.3

 19.7

27.2

4

4

52.4

66.7

100

100

VLED=Very low calorie diet
HBD=Hyoenergetic balanced diet 

Summary of Results:

 Weight Maintenance of All Subjects and Selected Subgroups

Group Years of Follow-up Number of Studies Number of Subjects

Initial Weight

(Kg)

Weight Loss

(Kg)

Weight Loss Maintenance

(Kg)

Percentage Weight Loss Maintenance(Kg)

Reduced Weight(Percentage)

All 4.5 13 1081 98 14 3.00 (2.54, 3.45) 23.40 (20.4,26.4) 3.15 (2.69, 3.62)
Men 4.4 5 247 115 18.30 4.70 (2.86, 6.54) 30.50 (21.5,39.4) 4.48 (2.89, 6.06)
Women 4.4 6 534 95 16.60 4.66 (3.52, 5.80) 23.60 (18.4, 28.8) 4.67 (2.55, 5.79)
VLED 4.5 4 578 106 24.10 7.05 (6.04, 8.06) 29.40 (25.2, 33.6) 6.59 (5.65, 7.54)
HBD 4.5 8 448 93 8.80 1.99 (1.47, 5.51) 17.80 (13.4, 22.2) 2.11 (1.56, 2.65)
Lower Exercise 2.7 6 272 110 22.00 7.47 (6.29,8.66) 27.20 (22.8, 34.1) 6.6 (5.61, 7.71)
Higher Exercise 2.7 6 220 110 20.90 14.99 (13.48, 16.49) 53.80 (48.4, 59.2) 12.49 (11.24, 13.74)

 Other Findings

  • Exercise appears to be positively related to successful weight loss maintenance
  • Use of VLEDs or weight loss of more than 20kg was strongly related to long-term successful weight loss maintenance
  • No significant difference was observed in weight loss maintenance or weight reduction between women and men.
  • Weight loss maintenance four to five years after a structured weight loss program averaged approximately 3.0kg or approximately 23.4% of initial weight loss, representing a sustained reduction in body weight of 3.2%
  • Thirteen very low energy diet  (VLED) studies and 14 hypoenergetic balanced diet studies were evaluated
  • Median length of VLED intervention was 22 weeks and median length of HBD intervention was 12 weeks (P<0.001)
  • The percentage of individuals at four or five years of follow-up for VLEDs and HBDs were 55.4% and 79.7%, respectively
  • Individuals maintained 67% (95% CI: 65%, 69%) of their initial weight loss at one year, 44% (95% CI: 42%, 46%) at two years, 32% (95% CI: 29%, 32%) at three years, 28% (95% CI: 25%, 30%) at four years and 21% (95% CI: 18%, 25%) at five years.
Author Conclusion:
  • This meta-analysis of 29 reports of long-term weight loss maintenance indicated that weight loss maintenance four or five years after a structured weight loss program averages 3.0kg or 23% of initial weight loss, representing a sustained reduction in body weight of 3.2%
  • Individuals who participated in a VLED program or lost more than 20kg had a weight loss maintenance at four or five years of 7.0kg or 29% of initial weight loss, representing a sustained reduction in body weight of 6.6%.
Funding Source:
Government: VA-CDEA
Industry:
Health Management Resources
Other:
University/Hospital: VA Medical Center, University of Kentucky
Not-for-profit
0
Foundation associated with industry:
Reviewer Comments:
  • Meta-analysis of reseach conducted between 1970 to1999
  • Most studies made use of VLCD products no longer on the market.
Quality Criteria Checklist: Review Articles
Relevance Questions
  1. Will the answer if true, have a direct bearing on the health of patients? Yes
  2. Is the outcome or topic something that patients/clients/population groups would care about? Yes
  3. Is the problem addressed in the review one that is relevant to dietetics practice? Yes
  4. Will the information, if true, require a change in practice? Yes
 
Validity Questions
  1. Was the question for the review clearly focused and appropriate? Yes
  2. Was the search strategy used to locate relevant studies comprehensive? Were the databases searched and the search termsused described? Yes
  3. Were explicit methods used to select studies to include in the review? Were inclusion/exclusion criteria specified andappropriate? Wereselectionmethods unbiased? Yes
  4. Was there an appraisal of the quality and validity of studies included in the review? Were appraisal methodsspecified,appropriate, andreproducible? Yes
  5. Were specific treatments/interventions/exposures described? Were treatments similar enough to be combined? Yes
  6. Was the outcome of interest clearly indicated? Were other potential harms and benefits considered? Yes
  7. Were processes for data abstraction, synthesis, and analysis described? Were they applied consistently acrossstudies and groups? Was thereappropriate use of qualitative and/or quantitative synthesis? Was variation in findings among studies analyzed? Were heterogeneity issued considered? If data from studies were aggregated for meta-analysis, was the procedure described? Yes
  8. Are the results clearly presented in narrative and/or quantitative terms? If summary statistics are used, are levels ofsignificance and/or confidence intervals included? Yes
  9. Are conclusions supported by results with biases and limitations taken into consideration? Are limitations ofthe review identified anddiscussed? Yes
  10. Was bias due to the review's funding or sponsorship unlikely? Yes